Hi!

After doing the whole shebang I wonder if there is an easy way to find out what was changed in K-Ms code to match Mozilla updates and what was changed because of k-m-specific development.

I think there is way to filter CVS and get some diffs that way but well, I don't know. Just going through the code line by line would of course be possible, but that takes time. A lot of time.

I'm currently using TortoiseCVS, but it seems it is too, erm, light to be able to do such things.

Any help on that subject?

TIA!

have You asked on devs list?
chrome seems to have lots of alterations - but is this k-m code?

p.s.
ich wuenschte ich könnte so viel wie du.
& danke!
und 0.9 ist vergleichsweise langsam - ich hab mir binnen 20 minuten nen schnelleren bowser aus mozilla teilen machen können - wenn der 0.9 so released würde wäre es mir echt peinlich.würdest du wissen, wie man ihn besser optimiert?

No, I hate mailinglists. Especially if they're archived for ever without an option to opt out archiving. Then there's spam, etc. :-/

Chrome is separate from the program code. That's why you can exchange the chrome files without recompiling K-M. But there is a lot of dependence on Gecko (and so naturally it's chrome, too) in K-Ms code. So it is impossible to use old K-M-versions with the latest Mozilla code without altering all the things that were changed by mozilla.org. That's the problem I'm facing.


Well, I don't know much in respect to C++, I'm no C++-coder. But most programming languages have certain things in common and so it is possible to understand different code when looking at it for some time (and perhaps reading/learning a few things).

I still have to do real speed testing (perhaps next week, with a stopwatch <g>), but the official 0.9-preview doesn't feel that slow for *me*. It's quite snappy and rendering feels good, too.

My main build is currently a Dorian/Wechselbalg-based build with optimized rendering specs, but I'm frequently testing 0.9, too. I think WB feels bigger & milliseconds slower at loading (maybe due to it being a static build) compared to 0.9, which feels a bit different at page loading (I didn't change the default settings), not necessarily slower. But I'm going to have a closer look at that. I think my own builds are matching Ulf's. They are about the same size and feel similar when used with the same moz.backend. But my own mozilla build is especially optimized for my processor and therefore it feels a tiny bit faster when used with K-M, no matter who build it. :-)

I'm only compiling K-M to fix a few bugs and maybe change some things to match my needs, I don't plan on doing unofficial releases, so static builds will probably have to wait although they are only a few checkmarks in the compiler away. ;-)

You shouldn't feel awful about 0.9. It's a really big step forward compared to 0.8.2! And it is just like with FireFox - there are optimized and static FF builds that are faster then the official one, too. Yet I don't think there is (that) much opposition towards its' default non-static builds 'there'...

sorry that You do not like the mail list
- because devs do not usually come to forum.
did You have a look which cvs systems are recommended by mozilla.org
e. g. search via gemal dk who has a section on his home page about making mozilla programs? maybe another cvs could make your job easier.

i usually use:
http://www.24fun.com/downloadcenter/benchjs/benchjs.html
(layers plugin shut off and popup permitted)
or: http://scragz.com/tech/mozilla/test-rendering-time.php
to get an impression without a stopwatch.

You need speed differnces of 25% or more to notice differnces - i read in "ct" once
(here = my old hardware helps seeing it ; o )

the release candidate of FF that i downloaded was statik.
with the minimalistik base browser chrome used by W-B or 0.9
the resulting browser should be slightly faster than 0.9.

question - what compiler options make the unified xpt that W-B and the lastest FF releases have?

question - what compiler options make the unified xpt that W-B and the lastest FF releases have?
Dunno. Are you looking for about:buildconfig?

Has anyone in here an idea re. my question in the beginning (diff)?

Ra,

Ulf would be best to answer that. You can email him directly or email the dev list with the info you posted here. You can set it up so that you don't receive mail from the list, but you can email to it.